[SVTmonkey]

This movie will scare the crap out of you (1h20min). Please don't yell at me before you watch the video:

http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/12047/9...by_USA_Evidence



"Loose Change 2nd Edition" is the follow-up to the most provocative 9-11 documentary on the market today.

This film shows direct connection between the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the United States government.

Evidence is derived from news footage, scientific fact, and most important, Americans who suffered through that tragic day.

IT IS EVERYONE'S duty TO VIEW THIS FILM!

[darkpuppet]

blah blah blah.. probably another silly conspiracy theory video... people really need better hobbies.

let me guess.

AN AIRPLANE DIDN'T HIT THE PENTAGON!

sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

[NefCanuck]

darkpuppet,Jun 21 2006, 03:46 PM Wrote:blah blah blah.. probably another silly conspiracy theory video..

sometimes a cigar is just a cigar
[right][snapback]194517[/snapback][/right]

Thank you Bill Clinton... there's a Monica Lewinsky on line two for you :P :rofl:

NefCanuck

[SVTmonkey]

Ahhh, but you won't watch the video will you? Too scared it will shatter your perfect world? Watch it, then talk.

[SVTmonkey]

Oh, here's their website:

http://www.loosechange911.com/

[SVTmonkey]

PS. If you're not hooked within the first 5 minutes, then you are not alive.

[darkpuppet]

SVTmonkey,Jun 21 2006, 04:52 PM Wrote:Oh, here's their website:

http://www.loosechange911.com/
[right][snapback]194523[/snapback][/right]

we already covered how much hogwash loosechange is.

Just a bunch of people who are making their fortunes off of those who are willing to believe anything that is editorialized with fancy wipes and music.

The saddest part is that this s*** trivializes what happened that day, and it pisses me off how people are willing to forget everything they saw unfold before them in a mere 1h 20m.

Don't get me wrong, I'd normally get more enjoyment out of a 1h 20m of fantasy, but it would have been more enjoyable if it were actually believable.

[SVTmonkey]

So will you not watch it then?

[darkpuppet]

haha.. I'm 5 minutes into it, and it's hilarious!

let's take a bunch of loosely coupled events and fabricate a big conspiracy around it!

I cancelled a flight the morning of the attacks.. I was in on it! OMG!!!

I guess I'll have to dig up all the other documents of failed intelligence in history (including such wacky schemes to make Castro lose his beard to take away his manhood)...

know what a 'herd mentality' is?

it's when a bunch of people can be cowed into throwing away all common sense and logic to believe this crap.

People should feel ashamed for believing they are enlightened after watching this video.

[SVTmonkey]

darkpuppet,Jun 21 2006, 02:11 PM Wrote:know what a 'herd mentality' is? 

it's when a bunch of people can be cowed into throwing away all common sense and logic to believe this crap.

Hmm, so you're saying you can convince a ton of people to believe something that didn't really happen? Wow, thanks for proving my point.

I don't want to get in a huge battle with you over this cause you're entitled to your beliefs. But please get off your high horse. You are saying that this video is bulls*** without even watching it. A little hypocritical no?

And please don't assume I get all my knowledge from this video, that's insulting.

[darkpuppet]

SVTmonkey,Jun 21 2006, 05:25 PM Wrote:Hmm, so you're saying you can convince a ton of people to believe something that didn't really happen?  Wow, thanks for proving my point.

I don't want to get in a huge battle with you over this cause you're entitled to your beliefs.  But please get off your high horse.  You are saying that this video is bulls*** without even watching it.  A little hypocritical no?

And please don't assume I get all my knowledge from this video, that's insulting.
[right][snapback]194539[/snapback][/right]

Well, you're the ones so willing to watch a movie and believe that your eyes have had the wool pulled over them. Not I.

I watched it unfold live, I followed the engineering reports and the stuff that went through the disaster recovery centers.. I'm educated on the actual history of espionage.. the successes, and failures, and recognize an actual pattern of failures, not successes that fully explain, even in offical authoritative documents that the events unfolded as you saw them on live TV.

I'm saying the message it delivers is absolute BS, yes, and I've watched about half an hour of it and it's still making zero sense.

Me, on a high horse? c'mon.. you posted this thinking that you're opening people's eyes to the truth. But it's not the truth... I don't think you've read any of the actual published reports on any of this. Of actual eyewitnesses, surveilance, or engineering/physicist views..

You want the truth?

You had a building engineered to withstand plane crashes of the largest plane of it's time (less than half the size of the one that hit it). The building utilized the latest technology of the 1960's.

that it was brought down by a modern plane twice as large and capable of what technology at the time couldn't predict is no surprise.

That the US has had other major failures in intelligence (including pearl harbour, which should have been easily detected if only the americans had headed a simple warning that the japanese were likely to attack -- what, attack us? no way!).

A government serving their own interests, coupled with the mentality that "it can't happen to us" allowed 9/11 to happen.

Not some conspiracy video hack's distorted version of history.

Don't tell me to watch a video to tell me what to believe when I already took the effort to do my own research.

People who believe this crud must check their mailboxes eagerly each day for that cheque from Bill Gates because they forwarded on a test e-mail that was obviously forwarded to them by someone in the know.

believe what you will.. I believe I'm not wrong in deriding anyone who believes such garbage. (I must break my mom's heart everytime I tell her that the chain-letter e-mails aren't going to supplement her retirement)

[SVTmonkey]

Holy crap...

First of all, I didn't post this link hoping to force ideas down people's throats. People must take everything with a grain of salt. This movie poses some serious and REAL questions that need to be answered. Do you seriously deny that this movie poses some real questions?

You speak with such an air of over compensated intelligence and yet you refuse to have an intelligent conversation. In two posts now you've basically called me stupid.

The amazing thing is that people believed that a fire could actually destroy a building whose steel is certified to more than 3000F and was designed to withstand way more than an airplane hitting it. My engineering degree forbids me to believe that a building will FREE FALL after burning for 45 minutes. Those buildings could not have collapsed the way they did without other detonations. Please do not lecture me on engineering.

I just would like to know how you negate the following:

- Audio tapes of firemen inside the buildings reporting numerous explosions.
- The whole bottom floor of the building exploded, and the base structure of the buildings completely melted.
- Billions of dollars of gold missing from the safes below the towers.
- The thousands of put options (bets that a stock will fall) days before the attacks.
- The Billion dollar insurance policy taken out on the towers 6 weeks before the attacks.

That's just a small percentage of the real questions that need to be answered. Besides the fact that for both of the other two crashes (pentagon and flight 93) there was absolutely no wreckage found.

Flight 93: Next time you are in a plane at 30,000 ft, try using your cell phone like they do in that "movie".

Obviously, not everything in this movie is true, everything has to be taken with a grain of salt. But to say outright that it's all bull, now THAT is ignorant. And please, keep this civil, no need to insult people's intelligence, that's not the way to start an intelligent conversation.

Plus, we can argue ad nauseum, I just wanted for people to see this so that they can ask some questions themselves. If it only reinforces your beliefs that's fine too, but at least they were open minded enough to see it.

[darkpuppet]

SVTmonkey,Jun 21 2006, 06:05 PM Wrote:Holy crap guy...you are a piece of work...

First of all, I didn't post this link hoping to force ideas down people's throats.  People must take everything with a grain of salt.  This movie poses some serious and REAL questions that need to be answered.  Do you seriously deny that this movie poses some real questions?

I'm sorry, but this stuff has been posted so many times, it gets tiring trying to reason with people...

Quote:You speak with such an air of over compensated intelligence and yet you refuse to have an intelligent conversation.  In two posts now you've basically called me stupid.

The amazing thing is that people believed that a fire could actually destroy a building whose steel is certified to more than 3000F and was designed to withstand way more than an airplane hitting it.  My engineering degree forbids me to believe that a building will FREE FALL after burning for 45 minutes.  Those buildings could not have collapsed the way they did without other detonations.  Please do not lecture me on engineering.

How can you ignore everything you must have learned as an engineer?

1) The building was not certified to withstand the impact of the plane that hit it.
2) Iron out of the ground melts at 2750F, or steel alloys tend to melt at about 2500F... at 2500F, the steel is a puddle of water. How does a puddle of water support the weight of the entire building? At less than half that temperature steel under load can start to sag...
3) Fireproofing substantially raises the thermal loads the structure can bear.
4) Fireproofing blown off the steel would expose steel directly to fire.
5) is there any documentation that certifies that particular fireproofing to withstand a 300MPH impact of a multi-tonne vehicle?

Quote:I just would like to know how you negate the following:

- Audio tapes of firemen inside the buildings reporting numerous explosions.

well, you DO have thousands of tonnes of concrete and steel falling in on itself.... combined with the rapid compression/movement of air, it would definitely sound like a series of explosions.

the sound explosions make is the sound of concussive force. A building floor the area of a city block has a helluva lot of concussive force.

Quote:- The whole bottom floor of the building exploded, and the base structure of the buildings completely melted.

You have a solid steel structure that is falling on itself, the walls are basically trying to keep the pressure in. You take a few hundred thousand tonnes of building, and drop the top on itself, where's the air and inner bits going to go? outwards... There's your explosion.

Also, bending steel heats it.... can that be denied? Hundreds of thousands tonnes of steel being bent and crushed on itself, coupled with burning fuel would put out a LOT of thermal energy. I'm not surprised that things were incinerated.

Quote:- Billions of dollars of gold missing from the safes below the towers.

1) the best estimates put it around $900 Million.. with a maximum estimated at maybe up to 160 billion. -- how is that a hard fact there was gold under there to disppear in the first place.
2) there were trucks removing gold the morning of the attacks, and a couple trucks were reported as found after the attacks. And in fact, an amount of gold was apparently recovered.
3) if you can provide the insurance records claiming the missing gold by the actual companies adds up to the amount claimed missing by conspiracy theorists, I might consider this point.

Quote:- The thousands of put options (bets that a stock will fall) days before the attacks.

I thought that stocks were going to fall come some announcements that day as well. To be honest, I had business reasons for my assumptions, not an airplane attack. Remember, this was 2001.. after the internet bubble burst and news of the first round of major cuts were coming down the pipeline.

Give me more time and I'll find those business reasons for you.

It's like me cancelling travel that day had no bearing on previous knowledge of any attack.

Quote:- The Billion dollar insurance policy taken out on the towers 6 weeks before the attacks.

I wouldn't renew a lease for that much money and not have an insurance policy on it. Who would be THAT stupid?

then again, I just had my car 'pimped', and didn't put in any extra insurance into it, and the stereo still went missing 6 weeks later. If I'd gotten my deductable lowered, I guess i would have been comitting fraud too? Regardless of when the incident happened, someone was paying for it.. in this case I did.. in the case of 9/11 the insurance companies did.

Quote:That's just a small percentage of the real questions that need to be answered.  Besides the fact that for both of the other two crashes (pentagon and flight 93) there was absolutely no wreckage found.

Flight 93: Next time you are in a plane at 30,000 ft, try using your cell phone like they do in that "movie".

Obviously, not everything in this movie is true, everything has to be taken with a grain of salt.  But to say outright that it's all bull, now THAT is ignorant.  And please, keep this civil, no need to insult people's intelligence, that's not the way to start an intelligent conversation.

Plus, we can argue ad nauseum, I just wanted for people to see this so that they can ask some questions themselves.  If it only reinforces your beliefs that's fine too, but at least they were open minded enough to see it.

I've known people to use their cellphones over land on a clear day (like that day) in an airplane and be instantly accosted by the stewardesses... I don't know how much signal they got tho.. I've never had my cell on myself, nor tried to turn it on to check myself.

Of course, we can't discuss this further without knowing the exact altitudes the plane was flying at or where it was or what type of cellphones were being used... (ie. navigating the plane by sight for landmarks in a cell-heavy area? satellite phone?)

The thing is that the video never discusses the counter points.. Sure there are a lot of questions.. tonnes of questions if people don't take the time to research things fully. A lot of these questions are answered, or even if unanswered don't support the theory that the US did it to themselves.

I'm sorry if I come off as condescending, but seriously.... how many times do I have to get the e-mail that bill gates will send me money if I forward on an e-mail before you get sick and tired of seeing it, and start wondering how gullible people are?

everyone's entitled to their opinion, but people are ignoring a lot of hard facts in supporting these conspiracy theories.

from some engineering resources quoted from here

Quote: .. "Only the containment building at a nuclear power plant" is designed to withstand such an impact and explosion, says Robert S. Vecchio, principal of metallurgical engineer Lucius Pitkin Inc., referring to the hijacked Boeing 767 airplanes, heavy with fuel, that slammed into each WTC tower.

Quote:As the fires burned, the structural steel on the breached floors and above would have softened and warped because of the intense heat, say sources. Fireproofed steel is only rated to resist 1,500 to 1,600° F. As the structure warped and weakened at the top of each tower, the frame, along with concrete slabs, furniture, file cabinets, and other materials, became an enormous, consolidated weight that eventually crushed the lower portions of the frame below.

....

When the stability was lost, the exterior columns buckled outward, allowing the floors above to drop down onto floors below, overloading and failing each one as it went down, he says.

....

According to one of the designers of the World Trade Center (WTC), the towers were originally designed to take the impact of a Boeing 707; and the impact of the aircraft on Sept. 11th did not take the buildings down. In fact, WTC One stood for 1 hour and WTC Two stood for 1 3/4 hours after impact. Engineers familiar with the chain of events suspect that heat from the massive and extraordinary fires weakened the structures and initiated the progressive collapses.

[ZX5focused]

let me solve this for everyone.........:1repost:

now play nice with the admin!!!!




http://www.focuscanada.net/forum/index.php...=terrorist&st=0

http://www.focuscanada.net/forum/index.php...hl=loose+change

[SVTmonkey]

Like you said, we have differing opinions. I'm not saying everything happened like it said in the movie, I just think it posed some serious questions that need to be answered.

Oh, the audio of the firemen was taken before the tower collapsed, and the bottom floor was destroyed well before the towers collapsed. Firemen were still entering the building. Anyways...like we both said...everything is arguable. I prefer to be on the pessimistic side ;)

[darkpuppet]

I'm sorry if I offend anyone with my posts in this thread.

It's nothing personal, honest!

But the fact remains that these conspiracy theories keep cropping up, and people post them (look at the title of this post) as if it's some huge revelation, and it's not...

there are a lot of questions to be answered.. I don't deny that, but the unanswered questions don't implicate the US as the executors of some brilliant plot against their own people. It' sjust not the case.

It's a simple (probably pretty complex actually) case of arrogance and blarring mistakes in intelligence.

Coverup? sure, why not.. if you screwed up that badly, wouldn't you try to cover it up? Hell, I've accidentally lit a friend on fire playing with gas and we did everything in our power for our parents not to find out. And that didn't result in thousands of lost lives or the start of a recession.

And there is absolutely no evidence that the buildings were brought down other than by the circumstances they were found in on that morning... that's not an opinion, that's an inarguable fact.

[nass]

instead of thinking that the US government was in on the attacks you should just think that they knew there was a real threat but failed to act upon it. Why would they not act upon this real threat from good sources? and why would they give a half assed attack on the country that the attack came from and fail to capture the man resonsible for it to go attack another country that had no ties to the attack or mastermind behind it and spend months looking for it's leader and make a big deal about making the world that much safer?

Saddam has never attacked America on American soil, to the best of my knowledge so why make a big deal about it?

bah all this talk gets you no where besides pissed off, why does a president like JFK get shot and Bush not!

[darkpuppet]

SVTmonkey,Jun 21 2006, 07:11 PM Wrote:Oh, the audio of the firemen was taken before the tower collapsed, and the bottom floor was destroyed well before the towers collapsed.  Firemen were still entering the building.  Anyways...like we both said...everything is arguable.  I prefer to be on the pessimistic side ;)
[right][snapback]194560[/snapback][/right]

How was the bottom floor destroyed well before the towers collapsed? I don't believe there was any evidence that indicated anything other than collateral damage from a plane fully loaded with fuel hitting the building.

[darkpuppet]

nass,Jun 21 2006, 07:15 PM Wrote:instead of thinking that the US government was in on the attacks you should just think that they knew there was a real threat but failed to act upon it. Why would they not act upon this real threat from good sources? and why would they give a half assed attack on the country that the attack came from and fail to capture the man resonsible for it to go attack another country that had no ties to the attack or mastermind behind it and spend months looking for it's leader and make a big deal about making the world that much safer?

Saddam has never attacked America on American soil, to the best of my knowledge so why make a big deal about it?

bah all this talk gets you no where besides pissed off, why does a president like JFK get shot and Bush not!
[right][snapback]194562[/snapback][/right]

haha.. have you seen the guy leading the country? he sure seems pretty clueless to me.

I think that the statements of contrition (<--that's a word, right?) made immediately following the attacks genuinely reflect their thoughts before they had a chance to work on covering up their asses. They DID fail the american public...

trying to move the blame off them, and then following their own agendas after the fact is just ... well, typical of such a leadership IMO.

[SVT ZX3]

I don't buy into this conspiracy theory much, but there is one thing I have always had a hard time believing......Not to take anything away from the people on Flight93, but I just have a really hard time believing that the plane was not shot down by the US Air Force. Especially considering it was the last plane in the sky, it was known to be hi-jacked and the other 3 planes had already crashed into significant buildings as well. If the passangers did crash (or even just try) the plane yes they are all heros, but I find it hard to accept that they would have even been given the chance to do so. To me the objective would seem clear, bring it down by force before it has a chance to inflinct damage. To deny that the government gave orders to shoot down a plane with American civilians on board and to propogate the cover up by portraying the passengers as heros seems too perfect. That is the only cover up I would suspect.

*I'm not saying I believe this as fact, just a suspicion I've always had*